Why thank you. You've just made my day.
Little sarcastic maybe, which was the intent (same as your kiddo...); but for sexism, though traditionally used by males, I've heard girls and guys call each other honeybuns - a title of affection, one referring to the opposite's back and the other referring to opposite's front. And there's no way to tell what gender someone really is in game. Many players I've met admit they sport the opposite character than the gender they use, for reasons of their own which is none of my business, nor do I care. Imo, everyone's free to sport whatever toon and say whatever nonoffending idea they like.

Reminds me of an article http://starnewsource.com/2013/04/24/...-students-cry/ I was reading yesterday, which is about a sad real life misperception. The world really needs to take a chill pill when it comes to finding every little excuse they can for putting someone else down. But I guess, we've become so worthless ourselves that any minute edge over our fellow human competitors is a major victory. And we're not 20 billion people yet...

Btw, meeting idea is still on. We can make a day when fleets and especially leaders come together, chill for a bit and talk about community issues or just say hi. If you like to come, post a date and time when you're available and we can work to set one up. And suggest a good name for it... Discuss.

Btw, meeting idea is still on. We can make a day when fleets and especially leaders come together, chill for a bit and talk about community issues or just say hi. If you like to come, post a date and time when you're available and we can work to set one up. And suggest a good name for it... Discuss.

Starfleet Dental's Ministry of Peace and Prosperity have been shopping this idea around with a few of the significant fleets for a couple of months now.

You should speak to Nbreeki@Nbreeki in-game and tell him you're interested in helping him set up the RP Roundtable.

I've been reading through this thread, some of it I agree with, some I don't, but there may be something here your missing.

Every fleet is something of its own, an idea, a design, a dream, all depends on the group of people that started it, or the visionary that designed it.

While I may very well have my own idea of what I think a community should be, someone may have a complete different idea. I may welcome the very average gamer, the person who gets on just to chill and hang out, to me its important that a member in my fleet experience no drama, that the fleet is a haven away from every day life. While another leader or group may be looking for Elite PVP'ers, the best of the best to do battle with other groups that have the same idea.

Now no one here is wrong, I recruit and get members by promoting a relaxed easy going community, while others may have a very strict rigid command line, neither one of us are wrong. That's just the way it is in every community, people do things their own way.

So while I applaud your drive to bring community's together, I would not say anyone should dictate why someone should join a fleet/guild , that is at the end of the day their choice. Sure I'll say come check us out, look around, see if this is for you, but picking a fleet or guild can be a make or break from some people, most of all new people to MMO's, it could sour the entire idea if they pick a bad one, but here is the thing, they picked it, it was their choice, and if within the first few days they hate it, well maybe they should have done a little more homework.

You know, I had a problem with the original thread that lead to this one but didn't post there because I just couldn't quite put my finger on what it was. Now I know.

This smacks of the worst sort of arrogance. Who are you to think that you have all of the answers for all of the thousands of Fleets in STO? All of the guilds, fellowships, or what-have-you in all of the other games? People are free to create Fleets to use as personal banks, Fleets to run up the ranks to sell provision-purchasable goods, and are free to sell Fleets that they're not interested in maintaining any more. If someone's account gets hacked and they sell the Fleet that they're the leader of, that's an issue of account security, not the Fleet system. If someone sells a Fleet over their members' protests, well, maybe the prospective members should've vetted the Fleet that they intended to join a bit better. Big Brother restrictions and lengthy charters are not necessary, warranted, or wanted.

On a side note, I doubt that you've ever played EVE. You'd hate it over there.

While the start of this post is correct, in that it is arrogant to think that these rules of conduct should apply to all fleets, it's equally arrogant to assume that the rules do not have any merit at all.

To xtern1ty: Something to add perhaps: I feel a fifth section should be included, as a *suggested* list of consequences for breaching a previously mentioned article/section.

I understand why many consider the tone of the Code to be arrogant and absolute. But that's because you're reading it in the wrong context. I wrote the Code from the first person character of a leader, since it is leaders usually in charge of such matters and who I thought it would mostly be relevant to. Though some fleets are happy without any rules, many more have them. Rules are made to be absolute because they are made by those in charge. Contrary to what some of you presume, I've been in game much longer than 3 months and have seen fleet terms that seem equally as arrogant when viewed by an outsider. I've also heard a few leaders in-game boast they rule their fleet with absolute authority, to the fleet's benefit. Benevolent as that may be, absolute authority = dictatorship = arrogance. If arrogance is what you're looking for, you're looking in the wrong place.

If you want more sections or modify existing ones, feel free to suggest specific additions so everyone can calmly discuss. Not all fleet leaders are closed to common ideas, despite the prevailing views in this thread. Some of the best are the ones who keep quiet.

So let me get this straight. I come here, unbiased, and look at the suggested fleet rules in the first post; and although I disagree with the implementation of these rules, I do salute them. And now you decide for me that I'm looking for arrogance and should look elsewhere?

And this takes the cake. Just as you suggested I do, I suggested a specific addition so everyone can calmly discuss. And now you imply that I think fleet leaders are closed and set in their ways, inflexible; and that I should keep quiet? Was there something I missed?

You had a golden opportunity here; but I find myself unable to look at anything else but the arrogance coming from these posts. Perhaps darkkindness was right. It's pretty arrogant to slap people who agree with you.

So let me get this straight. I come here, unbiased, and look at the suggested fleet rules in the first post; and although I disagree with the implementation of these rules, I do salute them. And now you decide for me that I'm looking for arrogance and should look elsewhere?

And this takes the cake. Just as you suggested I do, I suggested a specific addition so everyone can calmly discuss. And now you imply that I think fleet leaders are closed and set in their ways, inflexible; and that I should keep quiet? Was there something I missed?

You had a golden opportunity here; but I find myself unable to look at anything else but the arrogance coming from these posts. Perhaps darkkindness was right. It's pretty arrogant to slap people who agree with you.

Sorry you think I'm slapping your face, farthest thing from my mind considering your original post was one of more temperate posts and offered a good suggestion in an unbiased way. No, I was referring to the arrogance issue and I chose to highlight your post because you mentioned it in a indirect context, compared to others. The phrase you highlighted is addressed to the reader in general, not to you. In hindsight I should have used "if anyone" instead of "if you're", so you would'nt be confused.

As I've pointed out in other posts, any implying I'm doing is equally matched by everyone else's presuming. Whether it's a trick to derail the core idea of finding common subjects fleets/leaders can agree with, by focusing on villainizing the writer - me; would be equally presumptive for me to assert. Rather than attacking each other, which is pointless, we can focus on finding better principles and ideas the community can agree with. I'm sure someone is bound to retort this with "I don't agree with any principles at all," which in that case I would say, that's fine too. There are no right or wrong answers here, this is not a test. Just a discussion and ideas for whoever wants to contribute. Of course, if anyone thinks calm reasoning deprives them of a good wick-whack style fight, I'll be happy to oblige - off the forums. As you can see, I go out of my way to make everyone happy. You too stardestroyer001, might a drink cheer you up and clear our little misunderstanding? We can mull ideas great and small over a glass of Romulan Ale sometime, my treat. ^.^ Cheers to all! ^.^